ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

COASTAL TOWNS DESIGN FRAMEWORK VOLUME 3

MARCH 2007 Copyright © Meinhardt Infrastructure & Environment Pty Ltd 2007 Disclaimer Information in this document is current as of March 2007. While all professional care has been undertaken in preparing the document, Meinhardt accepts no liability for loss or damages incurred as a result of reliance placed upon its content. The mention of any company, product or process in this report does not constitute or imply endorsement by Meinhardt. CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION ...... 1 2. PROJECT SCOPE AND APPROACH ...... 2 3. SETTLEMENT STUDY AREA ...... 5 3.1 REGIONAL INFLUENCES ...... 5 3.2 SETTLEMENT DESCRIPTION ...... 6 4. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT CONTEXT ...... 12 4.1 STATE / REGIONAL PLANNING POLICY ...... 12 4.2 WELLINGTON PLANNING SCHEME ...... 15 4.3 DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY ...... 17 5. COMMUNITY VIEWS ...... 18 5.1 CONSULTATION PROGRAM ...... 18 5.2 KEY MATTERS FROM COMMUNITY FEEDBACK ...... 20 6. URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK PRINCIPLES ...... 21 7. ANALYSIS ...... 23 7.1 ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES ...... 23 8. STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK ...... 25 8.1 VISION ...... 25 8.2 KEY OBJECTIVES AND STRATEGIES ...... 26 9. IMPLEMENTATION ...... 28 9.1 INTRODUCTION ...... 28 9.2 MASTER PLANS ...... 28 9.3 PLANNING SCHEME PROVISIONS ...... 30 9.4 PRIORITIES ...... 31 9.5 OTHER ACTIONS ...... 32

PLANS PLAN 1 ROBERTSONS BEACH VEGETATION QUALITY PLAN PLAN 2 ROBERTSONS BEACH ZONING PLAN AND OVERLAY CONTROLS PLAN 3 ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN ANALYSIS PLAN 4 ROBERTSONS BEACH STRATEGY PLAN PLAN 5 ROBERTSONS BEACH MASTER PLAN APPENDICES Appendix A COASTAL SETTLEMENT FRAMEWORK Appendix B ENVIRONMENTAL DETAIL Appendix C SUMMARY OF LAND USE ZONES Appendix D COMMUNITY CONSULTATION SUMMARY Appendix E PROPOSED PLANNING CONTROLS Appendix F DESIGN GUIDELINES COASTAL TOWNS DESIGN FRAMEWORK

THE VISION FOR ROBERTSONS BEACH “Robertsons Beach will retain its character as a contained residential and holiday hamlet, bordered by the Nooramunga Marine and Wildlife Rerserve. It will have facilities for small boat use, and provide attractive areas on the foreshore for residents and day visitors. Buildings will remain low key but will improve in quality over time, while still reflecting the ‘coastal village’ character of the hamlet. The main focus of the settlement, the foreshore, will be easily accessed on foot and pathways will provide links to the adjoining natural areas.”

This final report details an Urban Design Framework for Robertsons Beach that will assist the realisation of this Vision over the next 15 - 20 years. The preparation of this document was initiated jointly by the Department of Sustainability and Environment, East Gippsland Shire Council, Wellington Shire Council and the Gippsland Coastal Board. This document is the result of the combined contributions of: • The community of Robertsons Beach • Project Steering Committee

Kate Nelson, Kim Phillips, Brett Millington, East Gippsland Shire Wellington Shire Gippsland Coastal Board Alan Freitag, Barry Hearsey, Peter Boyle, Department of Sustainability & Department of Sustainability Department of Sustainability Environment & Environment & Environment • East Gippsland Shire Councillors & officers • Wellington Shire Councillors & officers • Consultant Team

David Fetterplace, Christine Wallis, Bruce Echberg, Meinhardt Infrastructure & Environment Urban Futures Consulting Urban Initiatives Lidia Orsini, Stephen Axford, Leila Heggie, Meinhardt Infrastructure & Environment Urban Futures Consulting Urban Initiatives Sarah Davison, Bill Unkles, Jen Petrie, Meinhardt Infrastructure & Environment Saturn Corporate Resources Urban Initiatives Dominique Miot, Emma Moysey, Sally Malone, Meinhardt Infrastructure & Environment Ecology Australia Urban Initiatives David Hudson, Geoff Carr, Thomas Sichelkow, Meinhardt Infrastructure & Environment Ecology Australia Urban Initiatives Bertha Polianlis, Darren Quin, Meinhardt Infrastructure & Environment Ecology Australia ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

1. INTRODUCTION

Meinhardt Infrastructure & Environment Pty Ltd heads a planning consortium that was engaged by the East Gippsland and Wellington Shire Councils, in association with the Department of Sustainability and Environment and the Gippsland Coastal Board to prepare a Coastal Towns Design Framework for 19 towns within East Gippsland and Wellington Shires. The project team comprised Meinhardt Infrastructure & Environment Pty Ltd, Urban Initiatives Pty Ltd, Urban Futures Consulting, Saturn Corporate Resources Pty Ltd and Ecology Australia Pty Ltd.

What is an Urban Design Framework (UDF)? An Urban Design Framework provides strategic guidance for the future development of urban areas (which can range from specific sites to small townships and metropolitan suburbs). It establishes an integrated design vision that involves the generation of ideas and the preparation of realistic design concepts based on community consultation, research and analysis. The vision is realised through tools such as planning scheme changes, capital works projects and guidelines for private development. In preparing a UDF it is critical to: • Adopt a long term view (15-25 years); • Identify strategic goals and actions; • Examine social, cultural and economic opportunities as they affect physical form; and • Examine and identify synergies with neighbouring towns and the region.

Project Objectives The objective of the Coastal Towns Design Framework Project is: “To provide a sustainable vision for the future form, image and function of these settlements and give greater certainty to the local communities and investors about what is possible and appropriate in terms of future development.” Particular project objectives are: • Assist the implementation of the Victorian Coastal Strategy and the Integrated Coastal Planning for Gippsland Coastal Action Plan. • The preparation of objectives, strategies, policies and plans to support the vision for each town. • The provision of detailed design guidance and planning provisions for the settlements and development pressure areas. • The identification of priority actions and an implementation program that respond to identified needs.

Page 1 ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

2. PROJECT SCOPE AND APPROACH

The Coastal Towns Design Framework project is aimed at providing guidance on the location, type and extent of future development along the coast of the Wellington and East Gippsland Shires, with specific emphasis on nominated settlements. The project covers approximately 40% of the Victorian coastline from the NSW / Victorian border in the east and almost to Wilsons Promontory in the west (refer Figure 1 Robertsons Beach Location Plan). The individual towns for which a UDF is being prepared are:

Wellington Shire East Gippsland Shire • Robertsons Beach • Paynesville • Manns Beach • Raymond Island • McLoughlins Beach • Eagle Point • Woodside Beach • Metung • Seaspray • Nungurner • The Honeysuckles • Lakes Entrance • Paradise Beach / Golden • Lake Tyers Beach Beach • Marlo • Loch Sport • Bemm River • Mallacoota • Gipsy Point

The project is part of a suite of studies being undertaken in the region, including the Coastal Spaces Initiative, which aims to improve strategic planning for sustainable development in coastal Victoria. The Initiative includes the Coastal Spaces Landscape Assessment Study (September 2006), which is a key strategy document commissioned by the Department of Sustainability and Environment. The study focuses on the coastal areas of Gippsland (Bass Coast to the NSW border), the Bellarine Peninsula and the coast west of Warrnambool to the South Australian border. The project identifies and maps individual landscape characteristics within these coastal regions, identifies significant landscapes and provides an implementation framework to assist local government and other agencies in managing development impacts within coastal landscapes. The Coastal Spaces Initiative also includes the Recreational Nodes Study, work on Coastal Acid Sulphate Soils, the Geelong Corridor Strategy and Bellarine Strategic Plan, Urban Design Frameworks for South Gippsland, as well as the Urban Design Frameworks in this project. Each project will be informed by complementary work from other projects, as appropriate, including the Domestic Waste Water Management Plan in the Gippsland region, the Strategic Tourism Plan in East Gippsland Shire and the Subdivision Strategy in Wellington Shire. There are a number of regional studies that will also inform the development of the coastal towns in this project, including the Integrated Coastal Planning for Gippsland Coastal Action Plan (CAP), Gippsland Lakes

Page 2 ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

CAP and Gippsland Estuaries CAP. The Integrated Coastal Planning for Gippsland CAP provides for an integrated approach to coastal planning policy and management in Gippsland and will help ensure that coastal development occurs in a sustainable manner. The Gippsland Lakes CAP recognises that the region faces increasing development pressures and seeks to provide for and direct development that respects environmental values. The Gippsland Estuaries CAP aims to develop a strategic framework that will support planning and management processes for estuaries across Gippsland, whilst providing for the protection and enhancement of significant features (environmental, economic, social and cultural) of Gippsland’s estuaries. The final output from the Coastal Towns Design Framework project comprises three volumes: Volume 1 contains the Strategic Regional Background Report; Volume 2 contains the Between Settlements Strategic Framework; and Volume 3 contains the 19 individual Urban Design Frameworks.

Figure 1 Robertsons Beach Location Plan

Page 3 ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

Report Structure The report structure for each UDF commences from Section 3 with a review of the settlement study area, starting with the regional influences and a description of the settlement (under the headings of township profile, coastal settlement framework and role, population profile, natural resources and cultural heritage values). The next section (Section 4) focuses on the planning and development context, commencing with a review of the state/regional planning policy and the Wellington Planning Scheme. The review of development related issues covers building approvals, land supply and infrastructure. Community and stakeholder consultation forms a critical part of the information gathering process and Section 5 outlines the issues raised through the consultation process. The principles that underpin the UDF are outlined in Section 6 followed by an analysis of the specific issues and opportunities of the settlement (in Section 7). The strategic framework is presented in Section 8, which includes the vision and key objectives and strategies. The implementation plan is outlined in Section 9 and includes the site/s chosen to be the subject of a master plan, any planning scheme provisions required to implement the UDF and the priorities and programs (including project costings). Robertsons Beach waterfront

Page 4 ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

3. SETTLEMENT STUDY AREA

3.1 REGIONAL INFLUENCES

Robertsons Beach is a small residential hamlet created near the eastern edge of Nooramunga Marine Park and Wildlife Reserve. It has an outlook towards Port Albert some 3.5 km across the Marine Park waters and beyond to Wilsons Promontory. Yarram, 15 km to the north, is the nearest major town. Robertsons Beach is 220 km from Melbourne via the South Gippsland Highway. The Strategic Regional Background Report contained in Volume 1 provides an overview of the key regional issues and pressures that will affect the development of the Gippsland region. Of particular relevance to the future of Robertsons Beach are the following points: • The ageing of the population requires particular services and generally slows the economy. This demographic change affects the types of activities undertaken within a town and the community dynamic. • The “Seachange” phenomenon contributes to the ageing of the population. Seachangers also often seek part-time work or small business opportunities and sometimes have a relatively high level of disposable income due to the sale of assets. As new members of a community, seachangers often seek opportunities to become involved in town life. Robertsons Beach’s setting and proximity to larger centres will be important in relation to new settlers. • Economic growth prospects for the Shire as a whole will be focused in Sale. Job opportunities in Sale and surrounding areas will encourage settlement in areas within relatively close proximity. • Access to the South Gippsland areas, from Port Albert to Inverloch will be enhanced by improvements to the South Gippsland Highway and other roads in the region. Additional interest in waterfront residential areas within this part of the region can be expected. • Most coastal towns in Wellington Shire do not have reticulated water or sewerage. This is a significant development constraint within the sensitive coastal environment. Robertsons Beach does not have the benefit of such infrastructure. • The Nooramunga Marine Park and Wildlife Reserve is part of a Ramsar Site. Development in this locality requires careful management to protect the high levels of biodiversity that exist. • Robertsons Beach is a low lying area bordered by wetlands. A rise in sea levels or major coastal storm surges may impact on this settlement.

Page 5 ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

3.2 SETTLEMENT DESCRIPTION

3.2.1 Township Profile Robertsons Beach is a small residential settlement eight km from the South Gippsland Highway just beyond Tarraville (3 km to the north) and about 15 km from Yarram. It faces southwest across the Nooramunga Marine and Coastal Park towards the distinctive skyline of Port Albert. The road to the settlement is a sealed no-through road so there is no passing traffic and no commercial or public facilities within the town. Tarraville has a hall, tennis courts and sports oval, otherwise Yarram and Port Albert provide the closest shops and facilities. The settlement is developed on mostly small residential lots and a few larger parcels. Sarena Parade runs parallel to the foreshore and provides access to an informal boat ramp and open space along the Entry to settlement foreshore. There is limited parking and no public toilets or other facilities in this reserve, which is wedged by a low sea wall and has limited low vegetation. McEvoy and Princes Streets and Jacobsons Road are short streets that run at right angles to the beach and link to Langs Road to form the north eastern edge of the settlement. Langs Road is not fully developed as gazetted because its southern end, beyond McEvoy Street appears to be below flood and tidal levels. The area to the north and northeast of the settlement has good coverage with heathland vegetation including eucalypts. A commercial fishing lodge has been established in this area. The settlement is edged with farmland to the northeast and mangrove swamps to the south.

3.2.2 Coastal Settlement Framework and Role View to Port Albert from foreshore The analysis of broader regional trends and prospects in the Strategic Regional Background Report has provided the basis for the formulation of a strategic approach to managing development of the 19 towns in this study. Regional demographic projections, economic growth prospects, infrastructure availability, environmental sensitivity and strategic policy directions are key determinants. This broader analysis in combination with investigations focused on the individual settlements has enabled the development of a simple framework of settlements for this coastal project. This framework identifies the role of each settlement in the region, and its capacity for growth and expansion. In turn the defined place in the framework has implications for the expansion of each settlement beyond existing boundaries, the protection of high value environmental resources within or adjoining the settlement, the nature of local character and its protection and the capacity of infrastructure and services and future provision. Based on this framework an overview of the role and development potential is provided in Appendix A. In this context the future for Robertsons Beach in relation to the other coastal towns within the study area is as a Small Village not likely to expand. Some of the attributes of a Small Village include a population less than 200, a general store or no facilities and on-

Page 6 ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

site waste disposal. As a result, any growth experienced by Robertsons Beach is likely to be minor and be contained within the existing subdivided area.

3.2.3 Population Profile Woodside Beach, Manns Beach, Robertsons Beach and McLoughlins Beach are all located within two adjacent Census Collector Districts (CCDs). Unfortunately as Woodside Beach sits astride the border of the CCDs it is necessary to examine these as a single unit. The two CCDs had a population of 564 persons on Census night 2001 and a total of 469 dwellings. Based on a dwelling count from 2004 aerial photographs, the four settlements collectively accounted for 406 of these dwellings. Robertsons Beach contained 54 dwellings in 2004, 13.3% of the dwellings in these four localities. The CCDs had a mean household size of 2.28 persons per occupied dwelling and a very high 50.1% of the dwellings were unoccupied on Census night. Assuming these ratios held for each settlement their populations on Census night would have been: Woodside Beach 170 Manns Beach 83 Robertsons Beach 61 McLoughlins Beach 147 Total 461 On this basis the population in the towns represents approximately 82% of the total population in the CCDs. As such the profile of the CCDs will be largely reflective of the locality residents. The average annual population growth rate for the Wellington Shire over the 15 years to 2001 was –0.3%, however the location of these settlements near the coast should ensure a slightly better growth performance in the absence of a major economic stimulus to the Shire. The Wellington Population Analysis: Issues and Discussion Paper, prepared by the National Institute of Economic and Industry Research suggested that the population of Woodside & District may grow at a rate of between 0.4% and 0.7% over the 25 years to 2031. If this growth could be assumed for each of these localities the expected population and dwelling numbers for each by 2031 would be as follows:

Table 1 Population and Dwelling Number Estimation

Location Population in Change from Houses required Holiday All 2031 2001 at 2.3pph houses houses Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Total (MAX) Woodside Beach 188 203 18 33 8 14 4 7 21 Manns Beach 92 99 9 16 4 7 2 4 11 Robertsons Beach 68 73 7 12 3 5 2 3 8 McLoughlins Beach 162 175 15 28 7 12 3 6 18 TOTAL 510 550 49 89 22 38 11 20 58

Page 7 ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

This represents a total increase of between 49 to 89 persons in the four settlements. This would be likely to generate net new housing demand for some 22 to 38 houses, plus another 11 to 20 houses for holiday homes if the current ratios apply. At these growth rates an additional total housing demand of 8 houses is estimated at Robertsons Beach by 2031. If the household size continued to decline in the period to 2031, as is expected to occur, there would be a minor increase in the number of houses required. Woodside & District is very popular for holiday accommodation offering low cost housing for this market. This by itself will now attract stronger interest as the landscape values are relatively low in these towns by comparison with other settlements. The median age of residents in the combined areas is 47 years compared to only 37 for the Shire of Wellington and 35 years for Regional Victoria. While the proportion of persons aged 0-14 years (22.7%) is similar to the Shire and Regional Victorian averages, the area has only 15.4% of residents aged 15 to 34 years compared to 24.4% for the Shire. While 19.0% of residents are aged between 55 and 64 years compared to only 9.7% for the Shire, the share of persons aged 64 and over (14.2%) is similar to the Shire average. The employment participation rate was 49.7%, and the unemployment rate for the area was 9.7%, some 1.9% above the Shire average. Agriculture Forestry and Fishing is by far the most important industry sector, accounting for 36.4% of local employment, with the next most important sector being Manufacturing at 11.9% followed by Retail Trade at 10.2%, presumably most of these persons were employed in the nearby township of Yarram. The educational attainment of the local residents is relatively low, with only 21.9% holding post secondary qualifications, only 8.8% held qualifications at the degree level or above compared to 10.1% for the Shire and 12.8% for Regional Victoria. The median weekly family and household incomes for the area were each in the $300-$399 range, approximately half the equivalent figures for the Shire.

3.2.4 Natural Resources

General Description Robertsons Beach fronts the Nooramunga Marine and Wildlife Reserve, whilst further west lies the Corner Inlet Marine and Coastal Park. The Tarra River flows into the inlet at Robertsons Beach. These areas of shallow marine waters and intertidal mudflats are protected from Bass Strait by a complex of barrier islands and isolated granite islands.

Flora Values A total of five Ecological Vegetation Classes (EVCs) have been mapped for the Robertsons Beach area (see Appendix B – Environmental Detail) and residential development and agricultural land occupy areas formerly Wetland fringe of foreshore carrying Heathy Woodland, and Swamp Scrub (which was dominated by Swamp Paperbark). Further development is highly constrained by Coastal Saltmarsh on the south-east outskirts of the settlement, and by fairly extensive, as well as fragmented blocks of Heathy Woodland.

Page 8 ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

Despite the fragmentation and modifications such as extensive slashing, Heathy Woodland, which is dominated by Coast Manna Gum retains good quality, partly because of the low-nutrient sandy soil precluding invasion by many weed species. Locally however some highly invasive weed species have ‘escaped’ from gardens. ` All remnant Heathy Woodland (and to a lesser extent Swamp Scrub) has high landscape values associated particularly with the Coast Manna Gums of attractive form and the lush, vibrant foliage of the canopy. Considerable recruitment of Coast Manna Gum has occurred within the settlement from isolated trees or stands of trees, and is mostly represented by vigorous young saplings. When these mature they will have important landscape values. Efforts should be made to protect all trees with the appropriate planning overlays.

Fauna Values At the Nooramunga Marine and Wildlife Reserve, 32 species of migratory waders have been recorded, including the largest concentrations of Bar- tailed Godwit and Great Knot in south-eastern Australia. In summer, the ocean beaches and sand spits are used as nesting sites by shore birds which include Pied Oystercatcher, Crested Tern, Caspian Tern, and the rare Hooded Plover, Fairy Tern and Little Tern. The White-bellied Sea Eagle, Orange-bellied Parrot and the Ground Parrot have also been recorded from this area. The Swamp Antechinus has been recorded on nearby Snake, Sunday and Drum Islands. The New Holland Mouse has been recorded from islands to the east of Robertsons Beach. Nooramunga Marine & Wildlife Reserve at Robertsons Beach Introduced species such as Hog Deer inhabit many of the offshore islands, including Snake and St Margaret Islands. The complete description of flora and fauna values is included in Appendix B – Environmental Detail.

Vegetation Quality The vegetation quality in and around each settlement was assessed through site visits as well as through desktop research. The information collected in the field was utilised, in conjunction with colour air-photo interpretation and in some cases reference to the literature, to broadly map the vegetation of each individual study area according to various categories. The quality of vegetation in and around Robertsons Beach has been classified as follows: High Quality Areas – High Quality Vegetation Areas (high constraints). Fragmented Vegetation Areas – High Quality Road Reserve Vegetation (where isolated from contiguous native vegetation on adjoining lands – moderate constraints). Existing Modified Areas – Existing Modified Areas (urban, various densities – low, moderate constraints). Low Quality Vegetation – Low Quality Vegetation Areas (pasture with scattered or isolated trees – low constraints). Refer Plan 1 Robertsons Beach Vegetation Quality Plan.

Page 9 ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

Acid Sulfate Soils Mapping of potential coastal acid sulfate soils by the Department of Primary Industries (2003) does not identify Robertsons Beach as an area likely to contain acid sulfate soils. Further investigations of acid sulfate soils in coastal areas are being undertaken as part of the Coastal Spaces Project under the coordination of the Department of Sustainability and Environment.

Flood Hazard Mapping of flood prone areas in various catchments of the Shire of Wellington was undertaken by Egis Consulting on behalf of the Department of Natural Resources and Environment in 2000. Mapping of 1% AEP (Annual Exceedance Probability) flood areas in the Robertsons Beach area indicates that the areas generally south of Cattanach’s Track are not subject to the 1% flood events. The areas to the north of Cattanach’s Track are contained within the floodway of the Tarra River which outfalls to Shoal Inlet at Robertsons Beach. A Floodway Overlay or Land Subject to Inundation Overlay does not affect any areas at Robertsons Beach.

3.2.5 Cultural Heritage Values All of the settlements covered by the Coastal Towns Design Framework Project are likely to contain substantial Aboriginal heritage values, due to their location in coastal and / or riverine environments, which were preferred occupation areas for Aboriginal people. Comprehensive cultural heritage survey in and around these settlements is very limited, although a number of sites of value have been identified in many of the towns. Given the sensitivity of these areas, the very limited previous cultural heritage assessments and the high likelihood of further Aboriginal sites to exist in the relevant locations, it is strongly recommended that further investigations are undertaken prior to significant development in these settlements. Based on information provided by Aboriginal Affairs Victoria (AAV) and drawn from the AAV register and other sources, within the Robertsons Beach area, there exist: • One known pre-contact Aboriginal heritage value site; • No Register of the National Estate listings; • No listings with Heritage Victoria; and • No sites covered by the Heritage Overlay in the Wellington Planning Scheme. Under Part IIA of the Commonwealth Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act 1984, Robertsons Beach is associated with the Central Gippsland Aboriginal Health and Housing Co-operative. There is a Native Title claim under the Commonwealth Native Title Act 1993 (NTA) in the area. The NTA requires notification of development on, or uses of public land and waters to claimants, potential claimants or owners. The NTA also makes provision for Indigenous Land Use Agreements concerning the use of land where native title has been determined to exist or where it is claimed to exist. Native title needs to be considered as part of the normal approval processes for activities

Page 10 ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

proposed on public land. Early consultation with the Department of Sustainability and Environment should occur on these processes and requirements. It is important to note that the potential for further (unrecorded) Aboriginal heritage sites to occur in Robertsons Beach is extremely high. Input from the local community has identified several sites, which are not formally listed, but are regarded as important to them.

Page 11 ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

4. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT CONTEXT

4.1 STATE / REGIONAL PLANNING POLICY

Various policies for the State and region are applicable to Robertsons Beach. The Victorian Coastal Strategy is the overarching policy and is supported by a range of documents, including: • Integrated Coastal Planning for Gippsland - Coastal Action Plan; • Gippsland Lakes Coastal Action Plan; • Gippsland Boating Coastal Action Plan; • Victoria’s Tourism Industry Strategic Plan 2002-2006; • Gippsland Regional Tourism Development Plan 2004-2007; • Victorian Tourism Infrastructure Development Strategy; • State Environment Protection Policy (Waters of Victoria); • State Planning Policy Framework contained in the Wellington Planning Scheme; and • Other local and regional policies and strategies. The relationship between these State and regional policies and local policies is shown in the following diagram.

Figure 2 Policy Structure

OTHER RELEVANT COASTAL PLANNING POLICY (Strategic Planning and Tourism)

Victorian Coastal Strategy State Planning Policy (VCS) Framework (SPPF) State Environment Protection Victoria’s Tourism Industry STATE Policy (Waters of Victoria) Strategic Plan 2002 -2006 Victorian Tourism Infrastructure Development Strategy

Integrated Coastal Planning for Municipal Strategic Gippsland Coastal Action Plan Statements (East (Integrated CAP) Gippsland and Wellington Planning Schemes) Gippsland Lakes Coastal Action Plan Gippsland Regional REGIONAL Estuaries Coastal Action Plan Tourism Development Plan (GRTDP) 2004 - 2007 Gippsland Boating Coastal Domestic Wastewater Action Plan Management Plan Climate Change in Eastern Victoria

Foreshore Management Plans Local Planning Policy LOCAL Framework (LPPF)

Page 12 ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

4.1.1 Victorian Coastal Strategy The Victorian Coastal Strategy is based on four hierarchical principles to guide decision making in relation to coastal activities. They are: • Provide for the protection of significant environmental features. • Ensure the sustainable use of natural coastal resources. • Undertake integrated planning and provide direction for the future. • With the satisfaction of these principles, facilitate suitable development on the coast within existing modified and resilient environments. Some key policies and directions contained in the Victorian Coastal Strategy relevant to this project are:

Coastal Land • Protect and improve biological diversity, coastal habitats and flora and fauna. • Identify significant natural values on freehold land and conserve them through planning scheme mechanisms. • Integrate catchment and coastal management.

People on the Coast • Actively seek opportunities to carry out improvement works along the coast that provide safe, family friendly beaches (eg. access tracks, disabled access, car parks and amenities). • Identify and manage on going and emerging public risks along the coast with emphasis on issues such as dangerous and unstable cliffs, changed climatic conditions and enhanced erosion and maintenance of coastal infrastructure (eg. seawalls, breakwaters). • Crown land camping grounds – improve user amenity and ensure accessibility to sites and facilities by all prospective users. • Tourism activities and development – provide for quality development, diversity of experience, encourage nature based tourism, give priority to tourism ventures that relate to the coastal context.

Coastal Access • Regional boating infrastructure plans will address safety, tide and weather constraints. • Manage vehicle access and rationalise foreshore parking. • Encourage alternatives to car circulation around townships. • Encourage public transport services (eg. buses) to and along the coast. • Improve access for all levels of mobility. • Progressively establish coastal walks to improve opportunities to enjoy the coast by foot.

Page 13 ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

Built Environment • Protect the character of coastal settlements. • Manage growth through defined township boundaries. • Prevent development proliferation outside of existing settlements. • Manage development in visually prominent and sensitive areas. • Improve, remove or relocate infrastructure to less physically and visually sensitive inland sites as the opportunity arises. • Maximise the use of community facilities on the foreshore. • Encourage development of planning scheme overlays to address significant environmental issues. Some of the key tenets contained in the supporting policies are summarised as follows: • Coastal development proposals should be evaluated on the basis of an assessment of infrastructure capacity and environmental, cultural and landscape values. • Tourism policy seeks to maximise the social and economic benefits of tourism development while maintaining regional community lifestyles. The development of the Gippsland Lakes as Victoria’s premier boating destination is one of the top priorities for the Gippsland region. • State planning policy encourages urban consolidation and housing diversity to accommodate population growth, promotes tourism development in regional Victoria, seeks to integrate land use and transport planning and provides for high quality urban design. • Environmental objectives included in State planning policy provide that planning and responsible authorities should have regard to Victoria’s Native Vegetation Management – A Framework for Action (Department of Natural Resources and Environment 2002). This means that if native vegetation is proposed to be removed, a Net Gain outcome needs to be achieved. This usually involves an offset action of some kind.

4.1.2 Climate Change and Sea Level Rise The world’s climate is changing and Australia’s average temperatures have increased 0.8ºC since 1900. It has been concluded by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that the activities of humans are interfering with the climate. Carbon dioxide emissions caused by burning fossil fuels for electricity and transportation, as well as land clearing and the release of methane and nitrous oxide are the key contributors to climate change. Climate change can affect precipitation, wind patterns and the frequency and severity of extreme weather events. Potential impacts of climate change include: reduced agricultural production due to higher temperatures and rainfall decreases affecting grazing and horticulture; rainfall and evaporation changes affecting the Mitchell, Tambo and Snowy Rivers and the water quality of the Gippsland Lakes and wetlands; and threats to marine biodiversity and estuarine ecosystems due to changes

Page 14 ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

to salinity, sea-level rise and loss of vegetation on the coastal fringe. ` The issue of sea level rise is an important consideration for coastal communities. A report prepared by the CSIRO titled Urban sea level rise projections for urban planning in Australia (2003) reviews the latest estimates for both global mean and regional sea level changes. The study notes that the current estimates for global mean sea level rise range from 3-30 centimetres by 2040. The study discusses ways in which sea level rise predictions can be dealt with by Councils/Shires, including artificial beach nourishment and establishment of sea walls. The CSIRO has also recently prepared a series of reports identifying Wave and tide protection at Robertsons some of the key factors influencing climate and weather events along the Beach Gippsland coast. This first phase of the Climate Change Study predicts that impacts to be expected include more frequent and more extreme storm events and a range of sea level rise implications. The Gippsland Coastal Board is now seeking to use the knowledge gained during Phase 1 of the Climate Change Study to model the vulnerability (exposure) and risk (probability of change) for the Gippsland Coast, its geomorphological features and processes, and the associated built and natural assets. The Board should continue its work in assessing climate change impacts on the coast in Gippsland together with East Gippsland and Wellington Shire Councils and other government agencies.

4.2 WELLINGTON PLANNING SCHEME

4.2.1 Municipal Strategic Statement The Wellington Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) identifies key influences for the municipality (21.02) and includes a range of objectives and strategies relating to: settlement (21.04); environment (21.05); and economic development (21.06). The settlement strategies encourage consolidation within existing town boundaries, compact urban forms, buildings in keeping with the local character and the provision of adequate effluent and storm water discharge systems. Infill medium density housing close to the centre of a town is encouraged to provide greater choice for the ageing population. Development is to be restricted where it threatens water quality or ecosystems, is subject to flooding or subsidence. Consolidation and infill development is expressly encouraged in coastal areas. Stormwater systems are to prevent nutrient loaded run-off and sediments entering waterways, wetlands and groundwater aquifers. There are no specific MSS strategies for the smaller urban areas such as Robertsons Beach. Strategies related to the environment promote the sustainable management of the Shire’s natural environment and rural land, agroforestry where appropriate, retention of native vegetation and the restriction of development that threatens water quality and ecosystem values. In particular, wetlands listed under the Ramsar Convention are to be protected and development on land liable to inundation is to be restricted.

Page 15 ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

Economic development strategies are aimed at expanding and diversifying the regional economy and increasing employment opportunities. These strategies relate to business, industry and commerce, agriculture and timber production and tourism.

4.2.2 Local Policies Local policies relevant to the coastal towns of Wellington include: Small Rural Lots Policy (22.02), Heritage Policy (22.03) and Car Parking Policy (22.04). The Small Rural Lots Policy discourages the creation of lots for residential development in farming land outside of urban areas. This policy assists in maintaining productive agricultural land in use and in preventing the creep of urban forms of development beyond townships. The Heritage Policy provides guidance for development in heritage places and in particular seeks to ensure that the conservation of known or potential indigenous cultural heritage sites is addressed. The Car Parking Policy specifies car parking rates for a range of commercial and industrial uses appropriate to local circumstances. Local policies contained within the planning scheme relating to the broader municipality include: Special Water Supply Catchment Areas; Airfields and Environs; Coal Resources and Coal Buffers. There are no local policies that specifically relate to the township.

4.2.3 Zoning The land subdivided into small residential lots west of Langs Road is zoned Township Zone (TZ). The larger allotments within the wooded area to the north and the farming land to the east of Langs Road are zoned Rural Zone (RUZ). A permit is not required for a dwelling in the TZ provided acceptable arrangements are made for water, waste disposal and electricity. Refer to Appendix C for further explanation of land use zones. Refer Plan 2 Robertsons Beach Zoning and Overlay Controls Plan (DSE 2006).

4.2.4 Overlays

Development and Design Overlay (DDO3) – Coastal Towns DDO3 aims to ensure that development does not detract from the natural and built character of coastal towns and considers the effects of building heights. A permit is required to construct or carry out works on buildings greater than 7.5 metres in height and matters of privacy, overshadowing and the impact on the streetscape, views and general character are considered. This overlay applies to the whole of the Township Zone at Robertson’s Beach and would affect only buildings that generally exceed two stories.

Environmental Significance Overlay (ESO1) – Coastal and Gippsland Lakes Environs ESO1 applies to the use or development of land along the Ninety Mile Beach and the Gippsland Lakes hinterland and aims to minimise the impact of human activities on the ecological values of the coastal and lakes environments. A permit is required for vegetation removal / alteration,

Page 16 ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

building construction (some limited exceptions are provided ), works and subdivision. Decision guidelines include the provision of stormwater and wastewater systems, minimisation of ground disturbance, visual impact and whether the development complements existing character, the need to retain vegetation and fauna habitat and the dynamic natural processes in the coastal environs. This overlay applies to the vegetated rural land abutting to the north of the settlement.

Environmental Significance Overlay (ESO2) - Wetlands ESO2 aims to enhance and protect the values of wetlands through the control of development to limit the environmental impacts of proposals. This overlay applies to the RUZ land to the east of the village. A permit is required for vegetation removal/alteration, building construction, works and subdivision. This Overlay does not impact on the existing developed area at Robertsons Beach. Refer Plan 2 Robertsons Beach Zoning and Overlay Controls Plan (DSE 2006).

4.3 DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY

4.3.1 Building Approvals There were four building permits issued for new dwellings in Robertsons Beach between 2000 and 2004. This rate of development is modest but House set back from the street comparable to other settlements of the same size within the study area during the same period (eg, Woodside Beach: 8).

4.3.2 Land Supply A majority of the existing lots within the Township Zone south of Princes Street contains a dwelling. There are two large unsubdivided parcels at the rear of those lots with foreshore frontage at the southern end of Langs Road. Several larger allotments and some unsubdivided parcels exist to the north of Princes Street. There are also several vacant lots in the rural zoned land to the north of the village. Satisfactory waste disposal is the major issue for the development of vacant land in this settlement.

4.3.3 Infrastructure Robertsons Beach has no reticulated water or sewerage and onsite waste disposal methods are utilised. Stormwater drainage is provided through roadside swales and all streets are unsealed. Overhead power lines are visually dominant.

Page 17 ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

5. COMMUNITY VIEWS

5.1 CONSULTATION PROGRAM

Community consultation has been a vital component of the Urban Design Framework process and public input has provided a clear direction for the improvement of each settlement. A three stage consultation process forms part of the project approach. This has been applied across the region with some local variation according to identified issues or pre-existing background work.1

As illustrated below the three stages are: Stage 1: Initial Community Meetings and feedback Stage 2: Draft Settlement Report display and feedback Stage 3: Draft UDF display and feedback Project Newsletters accompany each of these stages and Design Workshops have been conducted in Loch Sport, Metung and Mallacoota.

Figure 3 Overview of Consultation Process

PROCESS COMMUNICATION

NEWSLETTER 1 Initial Communication STAGE 1 Meetings Feedback Form

Design Workshops NEWSLETTER 2

Draft Settlement NEWSLETTER 3 STAGE 2 Report Display Feedback Form

Draft UDF NEWSLETTER 4 STAGE 3 Display Feedback Form

Newsletter 1 (Dec 2004) provided information on the project scope and program and foreshadowed the initial round of consultation undertaken in January 2005. A public meeting was held in each settlement to collect information on community values and the key issues for each town. All community members were invited to complete feedback forms or make submissions on their town and the results of these were collated and analysed. Approximately 1,000-1,100 people across the region attended these consultation sessions with 530 written submissions received.

1 Lakes Entrance, Paynesville and Raymond Island have followed a modified consultation approach (as these towns were added to the project at a later date). The process adopted in these 3 towns is described in Section 5 of their respective UDF report.

Page 18 ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

This process provided the community foundation for the development of a draft Vision for each town and assisted in shaping the draft UDF objectives and strategies for the town. Newsletter 2 (April 2005) reported on project progress, the earlier consultation outcomes and regional strategic issues relevant to the development of strategies for the towns. The design workshops were held in June 2005 for Mallacoota, Metung and Loch Sport. They involved volunteers from these communities focusing on potential projects for their town. Public display of draft Settlement Reports occurred in December 2005 / January 2006. The community was invited to provide feedback on the reports with Newsletter 3 and a Feedback Form provided. The information from the feedback resulted in some changes and refinement to the Vision, Objectives and Strategies. Approximately 240 submissions across the region were received in response to this display. The draft UDF was made available for comment in October/November 2006. Newsletter 4 and a further Feedback Form accompanied the public display and were distributed widely. Over 600 further submissions were made in response to the draft UDFs across the region. The Newsletters, reports, feedback and other documents generated for the project have been available through the Wellington and East Gippsland Shire websites at the various consultation stages of the project. Direct mail out and press publicity has also occurred. The respective Council, its officers and the consultant team have considered and evaluated the submissions. A number of amendments to the draft UDFs have resulted from the consideration of submissions. There were many matters of detail raised in relation to the draft UDFs including the content of the Master Plans, the proposed planning scheme amendments and other items. These matters will be addressed through the future implementation processes (see Section 9).

Page 19 ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

5.2 KEY MATTERS FROM COMMUNITY FEEDBACK A summary of the information provided by the Robertsons Beach community in Stages 1 and 2 of the consultation process is provided in Appendix D – Community Consultation Summary. The following table highlights the key community views expressed in the earlier stages of the consultation program.

Stage 1 Community Values Robertsons Beach • Peace and quiet. Key Issues from • Natural setting. Initial Public • Tidal views. Consultation • Affordability of township. (Approximately 45 people attended the Key Issues consultation meeting • Maintenance. and 4 submissions were received) • Road safety. • Environmental conservation. Public meeting, January 2005 • Inadequate boating facilities/water access. Priority Improvements • Improve fishing facilities and lake/beach access. • Create adequate car parking. • Give priority to bike / pedestrian circulation. Stage 2 Major Issues Robertsons Beach • Vision – generally supported; concern with term ‘remote’; more emphasis on natural environment Draft Settlement enhancement. Report Feedback • Objectives – generally supported; more emphasis (10 submissions were on promotion of natural environment; make received) reference to protection of Aboriginal heritage sites. • Strategies – refine alignment of walking trail; boat car park design, location and detail require further consideration; provide improved facilities on the foreshore. Other Comments • Need to consult local Aboriginal community. • Include town in a flood study and provide improved drainage. • Provide local rubbish collection.

Page 20 ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

6. URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK PRINCIPLES

Urban Design Frameworks provide a strategic planning tool to guide the development of urban places, ranging from metropolitan suburbs to small townships. An Urban Design Framework establishes an integrated design vision for a place in consultation with the community and assists the realisation of the vision through planning scheme changes, capital works projects and guidelines for private development. The preparation of an Urban Design Framework for each town in the study area is based upon a process of: analysis, the formulation of a structured approach/objectives and the identification of actions to achieve desired outcomes. This process is illustrated in the following diagram.

Figure 4 Urban Design Framework Process

Analysis Existing Policy Research Foundation Issues State, Regional, Local

Design Principles Approach Vision

Urban Design Plan Strategy Plan Master Plans Action

The existing State, regional and local policies provide the primary policy foundation for the Urban Design Framework. This is supported by local analysis, the identification of issues and broader areas of research, including regional trends and strategic approaches to similar issues elsewhere. The analysis is based on four broad subject areas: • local character – including landscape setting, building form and scale, key activities and public spaces; • the environment – including natural and cultural resources; • activities – including land use, economic development, recreation, social and community activities; • movement and access – including traffic and pedestrian circulation, parking, safety and linkages between activities. While these subject areas overlap, they can be seen as a group of influences that work together to form the character of the settlement. From this foundation a set of design principles have been formulated to guide the development of the 19 coastal towns. These principles underpin the Vision and proposed improvement actions for each of the towns.

Page 21 ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

GENERAL DESIGN PRINCIPLES

ENHANCE LOCAL CHARACTER The existing local character of each settlement should be protected and / or improved where appropriate. The land use types, style of built form, extent of development, landscape setting and public realm experience all contribute to the character of a locality and should be carefully considered within each unique context. CONSERVE THE ENVIRONMENT The coastal environments within which these settlements are located are important ecosystems that must be conserved for the future. The National Parks, marine and coastal parks and Ramsar wetlands are all significant natural assets and environmental impacts associated with development must be minimised. Many coastal areas contain sites and localities of indigenous cultural heritage importance and impacts on these assets must similarly be minimised. PROMOTE ACTIVITY TO SUSTAIN COMMUNITIES Community development is vital for any settlement and these small, regional communities require particular support with regard to the provision of services and facilities as well as economic stimulation. Vibrant public spaces that encourage social interaction can help engender a strong sense of community. IMPROVE ACCESS Accessibility should be inclusive of all and walkable settlements that allow safe and enjoyable pedestrian movement are desirable. A sense of arrival, effective circulation and wayfinding are also important features of a settlement.

These four principles underpin each of the Urban Design Frameworks and the settlement Vision outlined in Section 8 incorporates each principle as much as applicable for the local context.

Page 22 ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

7. ANALYSIS

Analysis of Robertsons Beach is underpinned by the Design Principles listed in Section 6 and a range of issues and opportunities relating to Robertsons Beach have been categorised appropriately. These are described below according to character, environment, activities and access and are documented in Plan 3 Robertsons Beach Urban Design Analysis. The extensive analysis work has incorporated field work, environmental assessment, policy analysis and community feedback, as discussed in preceding sections of this report.

7.1 ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES

7.1.1 Local Character Buildings vary in scale and age from small cottages to larger houses. There is no definable building style although most buildings are simple, light weight, low maintenance structures with steel gable or flat roofs. Most gardens are simple and low maintenance consistent with the exposure McEvoy Street - Main entry to foreshore of the site to sea breezes and the holiday function of most dwellings. There is no formal street tree planting and roads are simple formed and unformed gravel. New development could be expected to continue these forms of development and the primary attention to local character and identity should be through the enhancement of public areas – the foreshore, tree planting in road reserves and road construction. Development of the public realm especially along the waterfront with a pathway, vegetation, formalisation of road edges, parking areas and visitor facilities would enhance local character. Planning permits are not required for dwellings unless a 7.5 m height limit is exceeded. There is limited control and guidance on development. Ensuring there is adequate on-site waste disposal is the major consideration. Protection of remnant vegetation in the settlement and Single storey housing in Sarena Pde surrounds needs to be addressed.

7.1.2 Environment Rural Zone land directly north of the settlement contains small rural allotments with good vegetation cover. The use of these lots is not agricultural and they are likely to develop further for low density residential and tourist uses. The vegetation in this area is of a high quality and should be protected. The use of on-site waste disposal, the absence of effective storm water management systems and the sensitivity of the surrounding wetland areas highlight the potential for adverse environmental impacts. The local Aboriginal community has identified sites of cultural significance on public land around the settlement. A more detailed investigation of potential aboriginal cultural heritage sites should be carried out in relation Mixed housing in Sarena Pde on to works proposals on public land. foreshore

Page 23 ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

7.1.3 Activities There has been a low level of demand for development at Robertsons Beach in a period of relatively intense coastal development activity elsewhere. There is existing land within the settlement that has the potential for further subdivision. Expansion of the settlement beyond existing zoned boundaries is not appropriate given the function of the settlement, low demand and the environmental constraints. The settlement is an isolated residential precinct with no public facilities or shops, commercial facilities or services. The Illawong Fishing Lodge is a valued commercial development in the adjacent Rural zone to the north of the settlement. There is a preference expressed by the local community to have access to existing community facilities at Tarraville and commercial facilities at Yarram. While there are excellent water views towards Port Albert from the foreshore the town is not a day tourist destination. Shallow water on the town fringe limits boat launching and fishing opportunities. An absence of facilities on the foreshore is also a deterrent to day visitation. The boat ramp is a local arrangement for lightweight boats as there is no direct access to deep water. The area will continue to be used for some boat launching and formalisation of the parking and launching areas is Informal foreshore parking area desirable to control local erosion and degradation.

7.1.4 Movement and Access The road pattern is a simple grid with all of the access streets off Langs Road providing vistas of the inlet. Roads are generally shared by pedestrians, which is satisfactory in this local context, although some specific pedestrian pathways would provide greater safety for pedestrians in the longer term. The sealed section of Langs Road extends almost to Princes Street. Vehicles are slowed at the gravel road transition. Speed reduction signage and an enhanced town entry on the Robertsons Beach road would assist safer traffic management. It is noted that there is no defined road reserve for the section of Robertsons Beach Road, between Cattanach’s Track and its intersection with Langs Road at the entrance to the township. Poorly defined track on foreshore edge Sealing gravel roads and landscaping of road reserves with a combination of grass and selected indigenous tree species is desirable. There are no visitor facilities on the foreshore. Given the isolated location of the settlement and limited recreational opportunities available only basic provision is required. Clear designation of visitor car movement with a signed turnaround area and parking is however, suggested. A defined nature walk for residents and visitors could be developed along the foreshore, Cattanach’s Track and Langs Road.

Page 24 ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

8. STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK

The strategic direction for Robertsons Beach embodies the four General Design Principles described in Section 6 and reflects the analysis presented. The Vision outlines the future for the settlement and the subsequent key objectives and strategies are intended to facilitate a range of projects and other actions that will contribute to the development of the township expressed in the Vision. Objectives for the settlement support the existing policy context and reflect community issues. The strategies detailed identify key actions to achieve the objectives, and the Master Plan provides a design response to some of the strategies, while others may be addressed over time.

8.1 VISION

The way forward for Robertsons Beach addresses the significant issues identified and builds on the opportunities for enhancing the special qualities of the settlement. The proposed vision for Robertsons Beach is stated below and key objectives and strategies designed to realise this vision are also included. Some of the proposed strategies relate to more than one objective. This vision has been drawn from the values expressed by the community, planning policy and relevant influences.

“Robertsons Beach will retain its character as a contained residential and holiday hamlet, bordered by the Nooramunga Marine and Wildlife Reserve. It will have facilities for small boat use, and provide attractive areas on the foreshore for residents and day visitors. Buildings will remain low key but will improve in quality over time, while still reflecting the ‘coastal village’ character of the hamlet. The main focus of the settlement, the foreshore, will be easily accessed on foot and pathways will provide links to the adjoining natural areas.”

Page 25 ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

8.2 KEY OBJECTIVES AND STRATEGIES

OBJECTIVE 1:

To protect and enhance the character and environment of Robertsons Beach.

STRATEGIES: 1.1 Limit residential development to the existing Township Zone and subject to a review of suitable zoning for Illawong Lodge, retain the Rura Zone to the north. 1.2 Ensure the retention of natural vegetation areas within the settlement and on the Rural zoned land to the north. 1.3 Limit commercial and other land uses within the settlement and adjoining land to self contained tourist accommodation facilities. 1.4 Maintain and strengthen linkages with surrounding communities for community facilities and services to support the settlement. 1.5 Maintain view lines to the water but enhance streetscapes with overhead power line removal and limited street tree planting. 1.6 Investigate the potential for flooding in the settlement and ensure that the issue is addressed satisfactorily through a mechanism in the planning scheme. 1.7 Provide for effective storm water management within road reserves.

OBJECTIVE 2:

To improve the appearance and function of the foreshore area.

STRATEGIES: 2.1 Maintain and improve the sea wall to reduce foreshore erosion and provide tidal surge protection. 2.2 Formalise a limited area on the foreshore for light boat launching and trailer parking to facilitate access and control erosion and vegetation degradation. 2.3 Manage vehicle access to the foreshore with road construction Formalise foreshore access and formalise limited car parking areas to protect the wetland fringe vegetation.

OBJECTIVE 3:

To provide for improved pedestrian circulation and safety.

STRATEGIES: 3.1 Develop a pathway circuit along the foreshore to Cattanach’s Track and along Langs Road. 3.2 Provide better signage throughout the settlement, to manage visitor movement.

Page 26 ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

3.3 Define the town entry with appropriate landscaping and signage to reinforce identity and manage traffic speed. 3.4 Identify and protect significant Aboriginal cultural heritage sites adjacent to the pathway network. 3.5 Define the access road reservation from Cattanachs Track to Langs Road. Further documentation is provided in Plan 4 Robertsons Beach Strategy Plan.

Improve town entry

Page 27 ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

9. IMPLEMENTATION

9.1 INTRODUCTION

The Urban Design Framework for Robertsons Beach provides the basis for a number of short and longer term implementation actions. They include the following: • A framework for capital works expenditure on priority projects for the public realm is provided through the preparation of a Master Plan for those projects. Subject to the preparation of detailed design plans for construction these works may be carried out according to the availability of funds. The Master Plan proposal and other improvement concepts, together with associated cost estimates for Robertsons Beach are detailed in Section 9.2. • Changes to the planning scheme have been considered that will assist in achieving the strategic and design outcomes sought for Robertsons Beach. These include changes to the Municipal Strategic Statement, local policies, zone boundary amendments, overlays and guidelines as may be required. These proposals are detailed in Section 9.3. • The priority implementation actions for the UDF are indicated (Section 9.4) and a range of supporting actions are identified (Section 9.5), such as further investigations or design, supporting sources for capital works through applications to government and private funding bodies and the continuing involvement of the local community in the implementation process.

9.2 MASTER PLANS Definition of master plan: The analysis and consultation processes have generated specific projects “A document that describes, in narrative to become the subjects of Master Plans as part of the Urban Design and with maps, an overall development Framework. concept. The master plan is used to coordinate the preparation of more The criteria used to select projects for Master Plans are: detailed plans or may be a collection • Meets expressed community views on importance and priority. of detailed plans. The plan may be prepared by a local government to guide • Relevance to our recommended UDF general design principles and private and public development or by a the town vision statement. developer on a specific project.” Source: Dictionary of Real Estate Terms. Copyright 2004 • Importance to the strategic future of the town. by Barrons Educational Series, Inc. • Feasibility for implementation (ie, ability to be funded by Council and / or external grants). The Master Plans aim to provide a vision for how both the public and private realm could be developed over the time horizon of the study. Master Plans are conceptual design proposals developed over limited base plan information, typically Council’s cadastral property boundary information and air photography. They are not accurate drawings that take full account of detail such as services and other existing conditions. Each Master Plan will need another phase of design refinement, consultation and documentation before they can be implemented. They are big picture ideas that show a clear and coordinated way forward that can be developed and refined over time as funds become available to implement them.

Page 28 ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

The importance of good design and professional project management in the delivery of all master plans is emphasised. While specialists should design and coordinate the implementation of these projects, the community should be encouraged at all levels to assist with that process.

9.2.1 Master Plan Description

1. Reconstruction of Sarena Parade This road is currently an informal gravel track with swale drains allowing uncontrolled vehicle access to the foreshore. Sarena Parade should be reconstructed with a minimal width, sealed pavement with broken kerb edging that allows the maintenance of existing surface drainage system. The road should be built through the entire reservation with a constant, (say 4 metre) width nature strip in front of all properties. Three small 90 degree parking areas should be spaced along this road for limited visitor parking. Relocation of powerlines in this reserve underground is also recommended because of their high visual impact. Extension of a vehicle access road to the water edge is suggested within the road reserve at the southern end. 2. Recreation reserve improvement The existing sea wall will be retained and repaired where necessary. A new precast concrete cap is suggested to finish the wall, slightly Visually dominant powerlines should be higher, in a consistent manner. A shared path approximately 2 metres underground wide is suggested immediately behind this wall connecting along the length of the foreshore and back into the town at Jacobsons Rd, Princes Street and Mc Evoy Street. The space between the new road edge and pathway should generally be managed as low indigenous coastal vegetation. Some areas of mowed grass are possible where space is available for ball games etc. 3. Picnic and boat launching facilities Formalisation of boat launching is suggested with very limited car and trailer parking facilities. The provision of picnic facilities could be considered for use by visitors and local residents. 4. New town entry treatment This could be a simple landscape treatment with new signage. Repairs required to sea wall Refer Plan 5 Robertsons Beach Master Plan.

9.2.2 Cost Estimates and Implementation Program Indicative cost estimates for these projects have been prepared by measuring quantities from the drawings and making appropriate allowances for a range of factors that could not be measured from the drawings. Detailed design can make each project more economical or more expensive. The figures provided are a realistic guide for budgeting purposes enabling quality and durable new development. Variation of at least plus or minus 35% should be expected as projects are formulated in more detail.

Page 29 ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

The factor of cost escalation to the time of implementation should be anticipated in planning future project development. All costs quoted in this report are in 2006 dollars and future budgets will need to be adjusted to the anticipated time of construction. An indicative priority for implementation is suggested in the following table. The implementation program will need to consider the time required to plan and seek funding for projects, the logical order of development and the need to spread projects over the time horizon of this study. Funding sources are discussed in Section 9.5.

Table 2 Master Plan Projects, Indicative Costs 2006

Project summary Anticipated Project priority Anticipated cost year for government completion * sector (2006) 1. Reconstruction of $779,618 Medium 2015 Sarena Parade 2. Recreation reserve $507,500 Early 2008 improvement 3. Picnic and boat $59,955 Medium 2013 launching facilities TOTAL $1,347,073 * Note: Funding sources include grants, special rate or charge schemes, capital works allocations etc.

9.3 PLANNING SCHEME PROVISIONS

To assist the implementation of the Vision, objectives and strategies for Robertsons Beach a number of planning scheme modifications are proposed.

9.3.1 Municipal Strategic Statement Amendments to the MSS are required to provide for the Coastal Settlement Framework as described in Appendix A. Appropriate notations should be shown on the Strategic Framework Land Use Plan (Clause 21.03 - 2). Clause 21.04 ‘Settlement’ should be amended to reflect the Coastal Settlement Framework in the ‘Settlement Strategies – Coastal areas’ section of that Clause. In addition, Clause 21.04 should be amended to include the following specific township provisions: “Facilitate development in accordance with the Robertsons Beach Strategy Plan included in this clause. Manage the future development of Robertsons Beach in accordance with the following vision. (Insert Vision as per Section 8.1 of this report) Manage development of Robertsons Beach so as to implement the following objectives and strategies. (Insert Objectives and Strategies as per Section 8.2 of this report.) (Insert particular strategies that relate to the implementation of key development sites or Master Plan proposals.)”

Page 30 ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

9.3.2 Zones There are no changes proposed to the existing Township Zone boundary.

9.3.3 Overlays Delete Design and Development Overlay Schedule 3 from the Township Zone and replace it with an amended Design and Development Overlay Schedule – Development in Coastal Settlements (Wellington) as detailed in Appendix E.

9.3.4 Other Planning Scheme Actions In addition to these specific amendments to the planning scheme it is also recommended that Council adopt the draft UDF as policy and incorporate it as a reference document in the planning scheme.

9.3.5 Design Guidelines Design Guidelines have been prepared to assist in the interpretation of the objectives and strategies in this UDF (see Appendix F). The guidelines identify the valued characteristics of the town and its surrounding context. Taking into account the vision and strategic objectives, design objectives have been developed that seek to ensure new development reinforces and contributes positively to the valued elements of the town and surrounds. Guidance is provided in relation to approaches to development that are likely to achieve the design outcomes sought. Administration of performance based guidelines may require additional resources, public/community education and more particular information in relation to planning permit applications. These matters need to be considered in the implementation phase of this project.

9.3.6 Implementation of UDF Implementation of the Urban Design Framework through planning scheme changes will require Council to follow the requirements of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 in relation to planning scheme amendments. This process includes a statutory notification and exhibition process as detailed in the Act. The process would be likely to include hearings before an independent Panel appointed by the Minister for Planning.

9.4 PRIORITIES

The priority actions for the implementation of this UDF are: 1. Council adoption of the UDF as planning policy for the town. 2. Implementation of the statutory components of the UDF through amendments to the planning scheme. This would entail refinement of the recommended amendments, consideration of further scheme modifications that may be required, review of current State, MSS and local policy requirements and integration with regional policies.

Page 31 ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

3. Allocation of resources in relation to: • Communication of the UDF vision, strategies and objectives to the community (the general public and organisations), government and statutory authorities, development interests. • Capital works components of the UDF (the priority projects for funding in coastal areas need to be considered in relation to the needs of the Shire as a whole). • The administrative requirements to implement this plan.

9.5 OTHER ACTIONS

9.5.1 Further Investigations The research and consultation conducted for this project have identified several areas where better information should be obtained to understand some of the processes and pressures in coastal areas and hence refine the strategies to manage these issues. These matters include the issues listed below. They have been identified across the whole of the Coastal Towns Design Framework project area and their relevance may vary in some parts of this coastal region. • Recreational boating demand, the facilities required to support boating activities - both land and water based requires better information and planning. This applies particularly to the Gippsland Lakes region and the Nooramunga Coastal Park area. • While some flood studies have been undertaken and Land Subject to Inundation Overlays applied in a number of instances, there are some gaps in this analysis and from community feedback there are a range of issues associated with adequate local storm water drainage management, particularly where tidal movement can impact on such systems. • The issue of sea level rise in this region is under investigation in other related coastal studies. There is noticeable and active erosion of foreshore areas in some localities. The outcomes from these studies need to be considered in detail in relation to works to be carried out within foreshore reserves. • The project area as a whole has been identified as likely to contain many areas and sites that are of indigenous cultural heritage significance. Detailed archaeological appraisal of foreshore and other lands where development is proposed should be undertaken. Most of these actions require cooperation with or leadership from various government departments or authorities such as DSE, Parks Victoria, Gippsland Ports, Catchment Management Authorities, Gippsland Coastal Board and others. Close liaison of Council with these organisations in the implementation of this UDF is required.

9.5.2 Funding Sources Funds to supplement Council budgets for capital works and more detailed investigations may be sourced from the Federal and State governments and from a range of private philanthropic bodies.

Page 32 ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

Commonwealth Government

Regional Partnerships The Commonwealth Government provides funds through the Regional Partnerships program to assist communities to develop greater self reliance through: the provision of opportunities for economic and social participation; improved access to services; planning assistance, and assistance with structural adjustment. Australian Tourism Development Program (ATDP) The ATDP provides support for projects that will promote tourism development in regional and rural Australia; increase tourism expenditure, visitation and yield and enhance Australia’s competitiveness as a tourism destination. This program provided $8 million for 53 projects throughout Australia in 2005.

Victorian State Government There is a range of State government funds from which grants may be available for the works proposed in the Master Plans and other supporting projects. Regional Infrastructure Development Fund (RIDF) The RIDF is an umbrella State fund managed by Regional Development Victoria that has several relevant programs within the ‘Moving Forward in Provincial Victoria’ initiative established by the Government in November 2005. Specific programs under this initiative relevant to the Coastal Towns Design Framework project include: • Arts, Cultural and Recreational Facilities – This program is focused on building arts facilities in key locations across the State and enhancing existing facilities. Contribution to the economic growth of an area is an important criterion for these facilities. • Local Ports – This program is aimed at assisting the upgrade of regional ports and the replacement of existing infrastructure. In the Gippsland region ports in the Gippsland Lakes, Mallacoota and Snowy River areas are identified as likely to benefit from this program. • Small Towns – Eligible projects under this program include pathways, heritage buildings and sites, industrial estates, civic enhancement (town entrances, streetscaping, signage, open space upgrades), community facilities and tourism infrastructure. These projects must be located on public land. • Provincial Pathways – These funds provide for works to develop rail trails, walking tracks and pathways. Projects that assist the development of linkages, encourage tourism and facilitate bicycle use are likely to be given priority. The funding arrangements for each program vary and grants can match or exceed local contributions, which may be capital and also in-kind for some programs.

Page 33 ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

Community Support Fund (CSF) The CSF is administered by the Department for Victorian Communities and provides grants aimed at strengthening communities through the establishment of programs and facilities. Activities that may be eligible under this fund include community centres, sports and recreation facilities, community skill development, arts programs and facilities and tourism programs and facilities.

Council Funds An annual capital works allocation should be made by Council to fund the implementation of the Coastal Towns Design Framework project. Allocations should consider project elements that: • Will attract external support funding. • Will facilitate or encourage private sector investment. • Will be supported by community action programs. • Are essential to the project but may not be eligible for external funding support. • Should be funded through special rate or charge schemes. Consideration should also be given to the allocation of additional resources to Council’s planning department to assist the initial implementation of the planning scheme changes and the on-going administration of the planning controls proposed for these areas.

Other Funding Sources Other government funds and programs that should be considered for grant applications include: Coast Action / Coast Care, Coastal Risk Mitigation Program, Crown Land Reserves Improvement Program (Department of Sustainability and Environment); Boating Safety and Facilities Program (Marine Safety Victoria); Heritage Assistance Fund, Public Heritage Program (Heritage Victoria); Community Grants Program (Parks Victoria). In addition to government funding sources a range of private philanthropic organisations exist to provide funding assistance for tourism, community development and cultural development, eg BHP Trust, Esso Australia Grants, Ian Potter Cultural Trust, McPherson Smith Community Alliance and others. These and similar sources provide grants and/or matched funding for a wide range of projects.

9.5.3 Community Involvement The Coastal Towns Design Framework project has generated considerable community interest and involvement. There has been substantial community response to public discussions and all newsletters and publicity provided on the project. The process of information provision and updates on the implementation of the UDF should continue through Council’s regular community updates and newsletters. Direct community participation in the implementation process should also be considered. The consultation process has tapped into the considerable skills and knowledge that are available within each town. A local forum

Page 34 ROBERTSONS BEACH URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK

to discuss ideas, priorities and action projects may provide an additional valuable resource for the implementation process. Such a forum could be established in each town (provided there is local interest in doing so) and could comprise representative(s) of existing key community organisations in the town (progress groups, foreshore committees, sports clubs, historical societies, land care etc). Tasks for such groups could include: • Refinement of master plans. • Local initiatives for grant applications. • Community involvement in public realm works. • Dissemination of information on progress and input/comment on plan reviews or updates. • Collect data on issues or investigate them with Council staff, eg local character definition as proposed in the Design Guidelines. • Make recommendations to Council on annual capital works programs. In addition, these bodies could actively share skills and information and discuss issues with other towns in the region to develop more broadly based responses to regional issues. Such processes may be of particular benefit in relation to the social and economic issues facing these coastal communities.

Page 35 PLANS Key:

HIGH QUALITY AREAS High Quality Vegetation Areas (High constraints)

FRAGMENTED VEGETATION AREAS High Quality Road Reserve Vegetation (where isolated from contiguous native vegetation on adjoining lands - moderate constraints)

EXISTING MODIFIED AREAS Robertsons Beach Existing Modified Areas (urban, various densities – low, moderate constraints) VEGETATION QUALITY PLAN Plan 1 LOW QUALITY VEGETATION

Low Quality Vegetation Areas (pasture with scattered or isolated trees - low constraints) Meinhardt . Urban Initiatives . Urban Futures Consulting. Ecology Australia . Saturn Corporate Resources

APPENDIX A - COASTAL SETTLEMENT FRAMEWORK

COASTAL SETTLEMENT FRAMEWORK AND ROLE The analysis of broader regional trends and prospects in the Strategic Regional Background Paper has provided the basis for the formulation of a strategic approach to managing development of the 19 towns in this study. Regional demographic projections, economic growth prospects, infrastructure availability, environmental sensitivity and strategic policy directions are key determinants. This broader analysis in combination with investigations focused on the individual settlements has enabled the development of a simple framework of settlements for this coastal project. This framework identifies the role of each settlement in the region, and its capacity for growth and expansion. In turn the defined place in the framework has implications for the expansion of each settlement beyond existing boundaries, the protection of high value environmental resources within or adjoining the settlement, the nature of local character and its protection and the capacity of infrastructure and services and future provision. Settlement Framework

1 2 3 Settlement Type Population Services & Facilities Infrastructure District Town 2,000 - Wide range of commercial and Reticulated water, 10,000 community services, numerous sewerage and accommodation stocks, Local electricity. Government sub-branches, police stations, medical facilities, secondary school. Town 500 - 2,000 Range of commercial and community Reticulated water, services, community hall, school. sewerage and electricity. Village 200 - 500 Very limited commercial and community Reticulated water and services, community hall. electricity. No reticulated sewer. Small Village <200 General store or no facilities. Reticulated water or on site water collection. On site waste disposal. Reticulated electricity. Notes 1. Population range reflects ultimate population within the planning framework. 2. Facilities and services may vary according to geographical location in the region and the availability of services in accessible higher order settlements. 3. Assessment has included consideration of the Coastal Settlement Infrastructure Development Rating as provided in the Integrated Coastal Planning for Gippsland – Coastal Action Plan.

Based on this framework an overview of the role and development potential is provided in the following figure (Overview of Settlement Futures). In this context the future for Robertsons Beach in relation to the other coastal towns within the study area is as a Small Village not likely to expand. Overview of Settlement Futures

DISTRICT TOWN TOWN VILLAGE SMALL VILLAGE

SIGNIFICANT Paynesville Lake Tyers EXPANSION OF Beach EXISTING AREA Eagle Point

MINOR Mallacoota Marlo Nungurner EXPANSION OF Lakes Entrance EXISTING Seaspray Woodside AREA Beach

DEVELOPMENT Metung Raymond Gipsy Point WITHIN Island Loch Sport Bemm River EXISTING AREA Golden Beach / The Paradise Beach Honeysuckles McLoughlins Beach Manns Beach

Robertsons Beach

The future development of Paynesville and Lakes Entrance will be important for Eagle Point and Lake Tyers Beach respectively and partly allow for the expansion of these towns. APPENDIX B - ENVIRONMENTAL DETAILS Extract from East Gippsland Urban Design Frameworks - Ecological Constraints (Prepared by Ecology Australia 2005)

ROBERTSONS BEACH Municipality – Wellington Shire Robertsons Beach is the westernmost of the towns presented in this report and is located approximately 27km north-east of Wilsons Promontory. Tarra River flows into the inlet at Robertsons Beach. Robertsons Beach fronts the Nooramunga Marine and Wildlife Reserve, whilst further west lies the Corner Inlet Marine and Coastal Park. These areas of shallow marine waters and intertidal mudflats are protected from Bass Strait by a complex of barrier islands and isolated granite islands. Flora values A total of five Ecological Vegetation Classes have been mapped for the Robertsons Beach area (see below) and residential development and agriculture land occupy areas formerly carrying Heathy Woodland, and Swamp Scrub (which was dominated by Swamp paperbark, Melaleuca ericifolia). Further development is highly constrained by Coastal Saltmarsh on the south-east outskirts of the settlement, and by fairly extensive, as well as fragmented blocks of Heathy Woodland. Despite the fragmentation and modifications such as extensive slashing, Heathy Woodland, which is dominated by Coast Manna Gum (Eucalyptus viminalis ssp. pryoriana) retains good quality, partly because of the low-nutrient sandy soil precluding invasion by many weed species. Locally however some highly invasive weed species have ‘escaped’ from gardens. All remnant Heathy Woodland (and to a lesser extent Swamp Scrub) has high landscape values associated particularly with the Coast Manna Gums of attractive form and the lush, vibrant foliage of the canopy. Considerable recruitment of Coast Manna Gum has occurred within the settlement from isolated trees or stands of trees, and is mostly represented by vigorous young saplings. When these mature they will have important landscape values. Efforts should be made to protect all trees with the appropriate planning overlays. Listed in the table below are the extant Ecological Vegetation Classes (EVCs) mapped in Robertsons Beach, as well as rare or threatened flora species present (according to State and/or National database listings): the list is by no means exhaustive.

Ecological Vegetation Classes EVC Conservation status Coastal Saltmarsh LC Estuarine Wetland LC Heathy Woodland LC Swamp Scrub E Mangrove Shrubland LC Key: EVC Conservation status (Subject to verification by DSE): End.– Endangered, Vul. – Vulnerable, R – rare, D. – Depleted LC – Least concern

Rare or Threatened Flora Common Name Scientific Name EPBC DSE FFG Grey mangrove Avicennia marina ssp. australasica r Slender Leek-orchid Prasophyllum parvifolium v L Bog Gum Eucalyptus kitsoniana r Coast Ballart Exocarpos syrticola r Dusky Violet Viola fuscoviolacea r Key: Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (EPBC) categories: E = Endangered; V = Vulnerable. DSE (2005) categories: e = Endangered; r = Rare; v = Vulnerable; k = data deficient (Ross and Walsh 2003). State significance: FFG listings: L = listed

Fauna values At the Nooramunga Marine and Wildlife Reserve, 32 species of migratory waders have been recorded, including the largest concentrations of Bar-tailed Godwit, and Great Knot (endangered - DSE 2003a) in south-eastern Australia. In summer, the ocean beaches and sand spits are used as nesting sites by shore birds which include Pied Oystercatcher, Crested Tern, Caspian Tern, and the rare Hooded Plover (vulnerable - DSE 2003a), Fairy Tern (endangered - DSE 2003a) and Little Tern (vulnerable - DSE 2003a). The White-bellied Sea Eagle (vulnerable - DSE 2003a), Orange- bellied Parrot (endangered – EPBC Act 1999, critically endangered - DSE 2003a) and the Ground Parrot (endangered – DSE 2003a) have also been recorded from this area. The Swamp Antechinus (near threatened – DSE 2003a) has been recorded on nearby Snake, Sunday and Drum Islands. The New Holland Mouse (endangered – DSE 2003a) has been recorded from islands to the east of Robertsons Beach. Introduced species such as Hog Deer inhabit many of the offshore islands, including Snake and St Margaret Islands. Listed in the table below are the total numbers of bird, mammal, reptile, frog and fish species, including numbers of threatened species, recorded at Robertsons Beach, under the Victorian Fauna Display (DSE 2004b).

No. of threatened Fauna species# Introduced EPBC DSE FFG Total Birds 5 1 28 13 88 Mammals 0 0 0 1 9 Reptiles 0 0 0 0 6 Frogs 0 0 1 0 1 Fish 0 0 0 0 17

# Fauna species recorded within each study area and listed as threatened under the FFG Act, DSE (2003) or listed under the EPBC Act 1999 are outlined below. Fauna species recorded within a 5km radius of Robertsons Beach

Common Name Scientific Name EPBC NAP FFG DSE Feral Short-tailed Shearwater Puffinus tenuirostris Mi,M Great Cormorant Phalacrocorax carbo Little Black Cormorant Phalacrocorax sulcirostris Black-faced Cormorant Phalacrocorax fuscescens M NT Pied Cormorant Phalacrocorax varius NT Little Pied Cormorant Phalacrocorax melanoleucos Australian Pelican Pelecanus conspicillatus M Gull-billed Tern Sterna nilotica Mi,M L EN Caspian Tern Sterna caspia Mi,M L NT Crested Tern Sterna bergii Mi,M Little Tern Sterna albifrons sinensis Mi,M L VU Fairy Tern Sterna nereis Mi,M L EN Silver Gull Larus novaehollandiae Mi,M Pacific Gull Larus pacificus pacificus Mi,M NT Ruddy Turnstone Arenaria interpres Mi,M Pied Oystercatcher Haematopus longirostris Mi Sooty Oystercatcher Haematopus fuliginosus Mi NT Masked Lapwing Vanellus miles Mi Grey Plover Pluvialis squatarola Mi,M NT Hooded Plover Thinornis rubricollis Mi,M VU L VU Lesser Sand Plover Charadrius mongolus Mi,M VU Double-banded Plover Charadrius bicinctus Mi,M Greater Sand Plover Charadrius leschenaultii Mi,M VU Red-capped Plover Charadrius ruficapillus Mi,M Eastern Curlew Numenius madagascariensis Mi,M NT Whimbrel Numenius phaeopus Mi,M VU Black-tailed Godwit Limosa limosa Mi,M VU Bar-tailed Godwit Limosa lapponica Mi,M Grey-tailed Tattler Heteroscelus brevipes Mi,M L CE Common Sandpiper Actitis hypoleucos Mi,M VU Common Greenshank Tringa nebularia Mi,M Marsh Sandpiper Tringa stagnatilis Mi,M Terek Sandpiper Xenus cinereus Mi,M N EN Curlew Sandpiper Calidris ferruginea Mi,M Red-necked Stint Calidris ruficollis Mi,M Sharp-tailed Sandpiper Calidris acuminata Mi,M Red Knot Calidris canutus Mi,M NT Great Knot Calidris tenuirostris Mi,M L EN Sanderling Calidris alba Mi,M NT Australian White Ibis Threskiornis molucca M Royal Spoonbill Platalea regia VU Little Egret Egretta garzetta M L EN Intermediate Egret Ardea intermedia M L CE Great Egret Ardea alba Mi,M L VU White-faced Heron Egretta novaehollandiae White-necked Heron Ardea pacifica Common Name Scientific Name EPBC NAP FFG DSE Feral Nankeen Night-Heron Nycticorax caledonicus hilli M NT Black Swan Cygnus atratus Mi Pacific Black Duck Anas superciliosa Mi Chestnut Teal Anas castanea Mi Swamp Harrier Circus approximans Mi,M Brown Goshawk Accipiter fasciatus Mi,M White -bellied Sea -Eagle Haliaeetus leucogaster Mi,M L VU Whistling Kite Haliastur sphenurus Mi,M Black-shouldered Kite Elanus axillaris Mi Nankeen Kestrel Falco cenchroides Mi,M Yellow- tailed Black-Cockatoo Calyptorhynchus funereus Swift Parrot Lathamus discolor EN,M EN L EN Sacred Kingfisher Todiramphus sanctus M Welcome Swallow Hirundo neoxena M Grey Fantail Rhipidura albiscapa Willie Wagtail Rhipidura leucophrys Golden Whistler Pachycephala pectoralis Grey Shrike- thrush Colluricincla harmonica Magpie-lark Grallina cyanoleuca M Black-faced Cuckoo- shrike Coracina novaehollandiae M White -fronted Chat Epthianura albifrons Brown Thornbill Acanthiza pusilla White-browed Scrubwren Sericornis frontalis Striated Fieldwren Calamanthus fuliginosus Superb Fairy-wren Malurus cyaneus Spotted Pardalote Pardalotus punctatus punctatus Silvereye Zosterops lateralis M White-eared Honeyeater Lichenostomus leucotis Noisy Miner Manorina melanocephala Little Wattlebird Anthochaera chrysoptera Pied Currawong Strepera graculina Grey Butcherbird Cracticus torquatus Australian Magpie Gymnorhina tibicen Forest Raven Corvus tasmanicus M Australian Raven Corvus coronoides Common Tern Sterna hirundo Mi,M Little Raven Corvus mellori M Common Blackbird Turdus merula * House Sparrow Passer domesticus * European Goldfinch Carduelis carduelis * Common Myna Acridotheres tristis * Common Starling Sturnus vulgaris * Short-beaked Echidna Tachyglossus aculeatus Common Brushtail Possum Trichosurus vulpecula Common Wombat Vombatus ursinus Swamp Wallaby Wallabiabicolor Yellow- bellied Sheathtail-bat Saccolaimus flaviventris Australian Fur-seal Arctocephalus pusillus doriferus M CD Leopard Seal Hydrurga leptonyx M Long-finned Pilot Whale Globicephala melas Risso's Dolphin Grampus griseus Common Name Scientific Name EPBC NAP FFG DSE Feral Metallic Coo-lskink Niveoscincus metallicum Blotched Blu-etongued Lizard Tiliqua nigrolutea Red-bellied Black Snake Pseudechis porphyriacus Lowland Copperhead Austrelaps superbus unidentified water skink Eulamprus sp. Southern Toadlet Pseudophryne semimarmorata VU Short-finned Eel Anguilla australis Sandy Sprat Hyperlophus vittatus Estuary Perch Macquaria colonorum Australian Bass Macquaria novemaculeata Silver Trevally Pseudocaranx dentex Eastern Australian Salmon Arripis trutta Black Bream Acanthopagrus butcheri Luderick Girella tricuspidata Yelloweye Mullet Aldrichetta forsteri Sea Mullet Mugil cephalus * Bridled Goby Arenigobius bifrenatus Tamar River Goby Afurcagobius tamarensis Swan River Goby Pseudogobius olorum Flathead Gudgeon Philypnodon grandiceps Greenback Flounder Rhombosolea tapirina Black Sole Synaptura nigra Smooth Toadfish Tetractenos glaber Eastern Fortescue Centropogon australis

Key:

EPBC – Status under the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 CE – Critically endangered End – Endangered Vul – Vulnerable CD- Conservation dependent Mi – Listed on Migratory schedule M – listed on Marine overfly schedule NAP – Status under the National Action Plan (Garnett and Crowley 2000) NT – Near threatened PK – Poorly known FFG - Status under the Victorian Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 L – Listed under the Act T – Listed as a Threatening Process under the Act DSE – Status under DSE Advisory List of Threatened Vertebrate Fauna in Victoria (DSE 2003). CEn – Critically endangered EN – Endangered VU - Vulnerable NT – Near Threatened DD – Data Deficient Feral: * - Introduced species

APPENDIX C – SUMMARY OF LAND USE ZONES

SUMMARY OF LAND USE ZONES

Zone Abbreviation Intent Permit Requirements Residential 1 Zone R1Z To provide for residential A permit is not required for development. a dwelling. Low Density Residential LDRZ To provide for residential A permit is not required Zone development on lots of at least for a dwelling provided 0.4 hectare that may or may not the appropriate density of have reticulated sewerage. development is retained. Mixed Use Zone MUZ To provide for a range of A permit is not required for residential, commercial, industrial a dwelling on lots greater and other uses. than 300m2.

Township Zone TZ To provide for residential A permit is not required development and a range of for a dwelling, provided commercial, industrial and other certain requirements can uses in small towns. be satisfied if reticulated sewerage, water and/ or electricity are not available. Industrial 1 Zone IN1Z To provide for manufacturing A permit is not required industry, the storage and for a range of industrial distribution of goods and uses. Accommodation associated uses. is prohibited. A permit is required for all buildings and works. Industrial 3 Zone IN3Z To provide for industries and A permit is required for associated uses that have less most uses within this zone. impact on nearby sensitive uses. A permit is required for all buildings and works. Business 1 Zone B1Z To provide for the intensive A range of retail and development of business commercial uses do centres for retailing and other not require a permit. A complementary commercial, permit is required for entertainment and community accommodation. A permit uses. is required for all buildings and works. Rural Zone RUZ To provide for the sustainable Some rural uses do use of land for Extensive animal not require a permit. A husbandry and Crop raising. dwelling does not require a permit.

Rural Living Zone RLZ To provide for residential use in A permit is not required for a rural environment, while also a dwelling provided the lot allowing for agricultural land uses. is at least eight hectares (or as specified in the relevant schedule).

Public Use Zone PUZ To provide for public utility use Limited uses are permitted and community services and within this zone. facilities (eg, education, health and community). Public Park and PPRZ To provide for public recreation Limited uses are permitted Recreation Zone and open space and some within this zone. commercial uses. Public Conservation and PCRZ To protect and conserve the Limited uses are permitted Resource Zone natural environment, allowing within this zone. for public education and interpretation facilities and some resource based uses. Road Zone RDZ To provide for significant roads. Limited uses are permitted within this zone.

APPENDIX D - COMMUNITY CONSULTATION SUMMARY

ROBERTSONS BEACH STAGE 1 CONSULTATION OUTCOMES Public Meeting 30 January 2005 (45 people)

EXISTING CHARACTER (What’s valued): • Peace and quiet – not suburbia • No through road • Mangroves & sand flies • Significant local management of public areas • No boat ramp • Highly valued natural setting, fragile landscape • Historical associations with surrounding areas and families • Was affordable, but rates have increased • Tidal views

ISSUES • Minimum change desired – maximum assistance with maintenance • No change to current zoning • Better community consultation on planning • UDF for Tarraville • Lack of Council representation at meeting • UDF plan for Port Albert (wider view than Masterplan) • Signage re wildlife / slow speed • Visitor management signs • Information about subsidence • Planning permit notification – not provided adequately in the past • Improved consultation with community on planning scheme issues required • Work with town on development of UDF • Commercial fishing in adjacent waterways • Maintain current height controls • Flood level requirements – ensure notification

IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED • Raise road levels of road along foreshore, southern end • Improved storm water drainage • Erosion in north – control • Sea wall maintenance • Garbage collection (KEY ISSUE), provide visitor garbage facilities • Natural gas reticulation desired • Re establishment of jetty (Breakwater / Groyne), address siltation problem based on sound research • Erosion adjacent to access road • 3 phase power / under ground power • Rationalise boat trailer parking area (max 10), low key launching ramp • Extend low speed area (move 100 kph to outside town – across bridge?) • Town access road - shoulder, fine gravel, widen pavement, reduce speed • Gravel and maintain Cattanachs Road and provide bins • Circuit pathway / boardwalk (lower priority), low maintenance, external connections to Park • Fire refuge provision, emergency services plan, fire tanker in town • Maintain Yarram airfield

SUMMARY OF ISSUES FROM JANUARY 2005 MEETING Attendees at the Robertsons Beach public meeting in January 2005 highly valued the peace and quiet, natural setting, tidal views and affordability of the township. Specific views were expressed in relation to the following issues: The natural environment: commercial fishing in adjacent waterways; stormwater management; saltation problem around groyne; erosion; long term subsidence in this region along the foreshore and to the north at Cattanach’s track. General management / maintenance: sand flies; public areas; notification of flood level requirements; sea wall improvements; road levels along foreshore; rubbish bins; fire refuge; signage on wildlife crossings etc. Council: increased rates; improved consultation needed on planning; UDF for Tarraville and all of Port Albert; notification of permit applications; and garbage collection for the town was noted as a significant issue. Accessibility: boat trailer parking area needs rationalisation; reduce speed on town access road; circuit pathway / boardwalk; around the settlement maintain Yarram airfield. Overall, the community was concerned about the lack of communication on planning issues and desired minimum change to the settlement. Issues of maintenance were of the greatest importance. The community valued the low key nature of the settlement as a refuge from suburban development.

FEEDBACK FORMS AND SUBMISSIONS There were 4 people from Robertsons Beach who completed the feedback form or made a submission on the project. Of these, 100% were retired. 50% of the respondents were permanent residents. Temporary residents (ie, holiday home owners) represented 50%. The favourite aspect of Robertsons Beach identified by respondents was the peace and quiet. With regard to the key issues of the town, the top three are: 1) Road safety (50%) 2) Environmental conservation (50%) 3) Inadequate boating facilities/water access (50%) The top three suggested improvements are to: 1) Improve fishing facilities and lake/beach access (50%) 2) Create adequate car parking (50%) 3) Give priority to pedestrian/bike circulation (25%) ROBERTSONS BEACH STAGE 2 CONSULTATION OUTCOMES Feedback On Draft Settlement Report

Number of Responses: 10 Groups/ Organisations responding: Nil

MAJOR ISSUES RAISED & COMMENTS VISION • Generally supported, but concern with term ‘remote’ and that the village will not be positively promoted. • More emphasis required on natural environment enhancement. OBJECTIVES • Generally supported. • More emphasis required in relation to promotion of the natural environment, flora and fauna of the area. • Need to make particular reference to protection of Aboriginal heritage sites. STRATEGIES • Refine alignment of walking trail (move to sea wall edge, ensure no conflict with Aboriginal heritage sites and other detailed suggestions). • Boat car park design, location and detail require further consideration. • Provide improved facilities on the foreshore – visitors, playground and control erosion. OTHER COMMENTS • Communication with local community has been poor. • Need to consult local Aboriginal community. • Include town in a flood study and provide improved drainage. • Provide local rubbish collection.

PROPOSED ACTIONS FROM CONSULTATION: • Refine Vision and Objectives. • Refine pathway proposals and foreshore concepts.

APPENDIX E - PROPOSED PLANNING CONTROLS

SCHEDULE ? TO THE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY

Shown on the planning scheme map as DDO ?

DEVELOPMENT IN COASTAL SETTLEMENTS (WELLINGTON)

1.0 Design objectives

To protect the coastal township character of these settlements.

To ensure that the height and visual bulk of new dwellings and extensions are acceptable in the neighbourhood setting.

To encourage the design of new buildings in residential areas that minimise their impact on the prevailing natural landscape from both visual and ecological perspectives. New buildings should tread lightly and reflect and extend the principles of good design in terms of sustainability.

To ensure that buildings are designed and sited to avoid being visually obtrusive, particularly in terms of creating a silhouette above a skyline or existing tree canopy line when viewed from surrounding streets, properties, lakes or coastal areas.

To recognise where substantial vegetation cover is a dominant visual and environmental feature of the local area by ensuring that site areas are large enough to accommodate development while retaining natural or established vegetation cover.

To ensure that subdivision proposals will enable new buildings to be integrated with their site and the surrounding area in terms of the relationship to existing buildings, open space areas and the coastal landscape.

2.0 Buildings and works

A permit is not required for buildings and works other than in the circumstances specified in the following table.

Settlement Building Total area of Slope of Total External finishes height above proposed works land where building and materials of natural on a site works are to area buildings and ground level (including be carried proposed works building out on a site construction) Loch Sport Greater than Greater than 150 Greater than Greater than If the external 7.5 metres square metres 15 per cent 300 square materials, colours (greater than metres and finishes are not: 5 metres in low reflective, prominent subdued tones and areas) colours drawn from nature, natural timber Golden Beach Greater than Greater than 150 Greater than Greater than If the external / Paradise 7.5 metres square metres 15 per cent 300 square materials, colours Beach (greater than metres and finishes are not: 5 metres in low reflective, prominent subdued tones and areas) colours drawn from nature, natural timber The Greater than Greater than 150 Greater than If the external Honeysuckles 7.5 metres square metres 300 square materials, colours metres and finishes are not: low reflective, subdued tones and colours drawn from nature, natural timber

Settlement Building Total area of Slope of Total External finishes height above proposed works land where building and materials of natural on a site works are to area buildings and ground level (including be carried proposed works building out on a site construction) Seaspray Greater than 5 Greater than If the external metres 300 square materials, colours metres and finishes are not: low reflective, subdued tones and colours drawn from nature, natural timber Woodside Greater than Greater than 150 Greater than Beach 7.5 metres square metres 300 square metres McLoughlins Greater than Beach 7.5 metres Manns Beach Greater than 7.5 metres Robertsons Greater than Beach 7.5 metres

3.0 Application Requirements

An application for buildings and works must include the following information:

• The location of any proposed building clearly dimensioned on its allotment.

• Information that describes how the proposal achieves the design outcomes of the Residential Design Guidelines for the township.

• The location type and size of any trees to be removed.

• Sufficient spot heights (to AHD) to enable the slope of the site and the slope of the works area(s) to be determined.

• The location, dimensions and depth of any proposed excavations or fill.

• The colour, finishes and materials to be used on all external surfaces, including the roof.

• The location, height and form of any existing dwellings (on abutting and adjacent land, on land within 20 metres of a boundary of the site).

• Proposed new planting or site landscaping works.

4.0 Decision Guidelines

Before deciding on an application, the responsible authority must consider where relevant:

• The design objectives of this schedule.

• Any siting and design guidelines adopted by the responsible authority.

• Any siting and design guidelines prepared by the Victorian Coastal Council or Gippsland Coastal Board.

• The extent of any vegetation to be cleared and the impact of that clearance on the landscape setting of the locality.

• Whether there is a need for landscaping or vegetation screening.

• The extent of earthworks proposed and the means required to ensure site stability, prevent erosion and control storm water flows within the site.

• Whether there is a need to specify that building materials be low-reflective or of colours that do not detract from the landscape setting or from the character of nearby or adjacent buildings.

• The desirability of appropriately replacing destroyed or removed vegetation.

• The impact of any new development on adjoining public land.

• The effect of the proposed building on the availability of solar access to abutting or nearby properties.

• Whether there is a need for specific measures to be taken to ensure that the development minimises the risk of loss or damage from wildfire in accordance with the Australian Standard ‘Building in Bushfire-Prone Areas – CSIRO & Standards Australia (SAA HB36-1993)’.

• The effect of the bulk, siting and design of any proposed building on the general appearance of the area, particularly when viewed from adjacent waterways, beaches, tourist routes or viewpoints.

• Whether opportunities exist to avoid a building being visually obtrusive by the use of alternative building designs, including split level and staggered building forms that follow the natural slope of the land and reduce the need for site excavation and filling.

In relation to a proposed subdivision:

• The effect of any proposed subdivision or development on the environmental and landscape values of the site and of the local area, including the effect on streamlines, foreshores, wetlands, areas of remnant vegetation or areas prone to erosion.

• The need to contribute, where practicable, to the development of pedestrian walkways, to link residential areas and to provide access to community focal points, public land and activity areas such as commercial or community precincts, recreation areas or foreshore areas.

• Whether the proposed subdivision layout provides for the protection of existing natural vegetation, drainage lines, wetland areas and sites of cultural or heritage significance.

• The provision for water sensitive urban design.

• Provision in the design for the impact of coastal processes (the impacts from wind, waves, floods, storms, tides, erosion) on foreshore areas.

• Whether the allotment frontage width is consistent with the typical width of existing allotments in the locality.

• Whether the proposed subdivision layout relates sympathetically to the topography of the site and the surrounding land uses.

APPENDIX F - DESIGN GUIDELINES

Robertsons Beach Design Guidelines

1 1 1 2 3 3

Character Zones:

1 Residential Precinct Smaller lot development area, houses of a variety of sizes and ages.

2 Low Density Residential Precinct Larger lots set in bushland with some houses.

3 Foreshore Precinct Characterised by low vegetation and visually dominant sea wall. Robertsons Beach Design Guidelines

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of these guidelines is to encourage better site planning, building and design outcomes in the township of Robertsons Beach. These guidelines relate to general development within the town and are based upon an analysis of the existing urban character, the vision for the town and the context of the landscape setting as defi ned in the Coastal Spaces Landscape Assessment Study (DSE 2006).

These guidelines are to be considered in relation to planning permits required under the provisions of the Design and Development Overlay – Development in Coastal Settlements in the Wellington Planning Scheme.

EXISTING URBAN CHARACTER ASSESSMENT

Refer to Cover Sheet for map, assessment and photographs.

URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK VISION FOR ROBERTSONS BEACH

“Robertsons Beach will retain its character as a contained residential and holiday hamlet, bordered by the Nooramunga Marine and Wildlife Reserve. It will have facilities for small boat use, and provide attractive areas on the foreshore for residents and day visitors. Buildings will remain low key but will improve in quality over time, while still refl ecting the ‘coastal village’ character of the hamlet. The main focus of the settlement, the foreshore, will be easily accessed on foot and pathways will provide links to the adjoining natural areas.”

COASTAL SPACES LANDSCAPE ASSESSMENT STUDY

Statement of Signifi cance – Nooramunga Coast and islands

The Nooramunga Coast and Islands landscape is of state signifi cance for its visual qualities, including a jagged coastline of mangroves and mudfl ats, and a chain of sandy islands that protect the southern coast from the wild seas of Bass Strait.

The islands themselves are generally devoid of development, with campsites and walking tracks the only evidence of post contact human presence. The ‘untouched’ nature of the off shore landscape adds to the signifi cance of the expansive and scenic views that are available to surrounding features, including Wilsons Promontory.

The area is identifi ed by the Ramsar Convention as an internationally signifi cant wetland, and is on the Register of the National Estate for its coastal barriers, spits, sandy islands and extensive mudfl ats, as well as rare and endangered plant species. It is also protected as a marine and wildlife reserve, and is well known for its Aboriginal signifi cance, evidenced by numerous shell middens along the coast.

Assessment: State Signifi cance Robertsons Beach Design Guidelines

DESIGN GUIDELINE OBJECTIVES

• To protect those elements of the township that contribute positively to the on-going maintenance of the valued character of the township.

• To ensure that new buildings and works respect those valued character elements.

• To allow new buildings and works that enhance and improve the natural and built environment of the township.

TOWNSHIP VALUED CHARACTER ELEMENTS

Residential Areas

• The views from the surrounding landscape, both rural and views from the water.

• The spacing between buildings and the vegetation that in-fi lls between buildings.

• The low rise form of buildings with roof forms generally below the prevailing tree canopy.

• The generally small building mass of buildings in the landscape.

• The fragmented roof forms and mostly subdued colour of buildings; a result of either their paint or cladding colour or the masking effect of vegetation.

OUTCOMES SOUGHT FROM APPLICATION OF THE GUIDELINES

Protecting the valued elements of the township

• Buildings should be sited to minimise their visual intrusion through and above the surrounding tree canopy especially when they can be viewed from distant viewpoints.

• Buildings and works should be sited to minimise excavation.

• The felling of existing native trees and ground fl ora should be minimised. Where trees or ground fl ora are removed, new indigenous trees or ground fl ora should be planted so that in time they enhance the semi natural character that is valued by the local community.

New buildings and works to respect the valued character of the township

• The State Government has developed Siting and Design Guidelines for Structures on the Victorian Coast. Landscape Setting types have been defi ned for the Gippsland coast. These Guidelines express generic principles for sustainable coastal design and are to be considered in relation to all site specifi c design responses. Robertsons Beach Design Guidelines

• The Coastal Spaces Landscape Assessment Study has analysed the signifi cance of coastal landscapes in the region. Protection of the valued landscape character elements of the area is to be achieved through the application of Signifi cant Landscape Overlays in the non-urban areas and Design and Development Overlays in the urban areas. The valued coastal landscape character elements of the applicable sub-region are to be considered in relation to proposals for development. Projects are to be implemented having regard to the Best Practice Policies.

• New or renovated residential and service buildings should be complementary and subservient within the designated landscape. New buildings derived from another context and poorly sited can intrude upon a coastal town’s landscape in a way that is disappointing to the local community and visitors alike.

• While there is a place for new and old architecture in every context, coastal towns in Gippsland generally derive their character from the prevailing natural landscape and a built form of modest buildings with framed construction, coloured and clad to merge with the local natural landscape character. These are the attributes, expressed through contemporary architecture that the guidelines seek to encourage.

• Buildings should be sited to respect the amenity and privacy of neighbouring properties.

PARTICULAR CHARACTER ELEMENTS OF ROBERTSONS BEACH TOWNSHIP THAT SHOULD BE RESPECTED AND REINFORCED

Design Guidelines

Residential Precinct (Area 1)

• The preferred maximum building height is 7.5m.

• Minimise building footprints and site excavation.

• Avoid native vegetation removal in siting buildings and providing access to and within the site.

• Gardens should be developed with predominantly indigenous species.

• Heritage building styles and suburban project homes should be avoided, with preference given to simple recessive architecture. Robertsons Beach Design Guidelines

Low Density Residential (Area 2)

This precinct is not within the defi ned Settlement Boundary. Decisions in relation to permission required under ESO1 should take into account the following

• The preferred maximum building height is 7.5 metres.

• Buildings should be set back from the foreshore by at least 30 metres to ensure the foreshore edge to this precinct retains its natural vegetated character without the need for extended sea walls etc.

• Sites should maintain and extend their indigenous tree canopy with site landscape development designed to screen between sites and from the frontages.

Foreshore Precinct (Area 3)

This land is public land. A Master Plan design study recommends improvements to enhance its appearance and sustainability.